BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Opinions not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Saturday, April 23, 2016

More new rules on security,

Look out for more new rules on security, compliments of yet another LANL screw-up.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/in-lawsuit-lanl-worker-alleges-discrimination/article_53d577a4-9171-5231-94f1-59ca44d483fb.html

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

I read about this. Each woman is allowed to download, delabel, circulate and save at home 1800 confidential and 25 top secret documents every 4 years

She can also say the magic wprd "sorry, i didn't know".

Anonymous said...

And if she abandons her responsibilities and four or more people die she is qualified to run for president.

Anonymous said...

This guy has always had a huge chip on his shoulder and a propensity for holding a grudge for any minor slight he happens to imagine. He can't understand why no one sees his greatness and vast experience, and doesn't see that his endless carping and humiliating rumor-mongering about fellow employees causes him to be hated and shunned by supervisors and coworkers alike. Nice guy to have a beer with, until he starts in on his colleagues and bosses alike. Poisonous personality.

Anonymous said...

Though she appears to be the most orthodox candidate of a chaotic election, the State Department leader's careless violation of security practices call into question her sincerity and judgement. ...as it would if you did it.

Anonymous said...

Funny, I thought it was the Party of So-Cal-ism and Libation. Now that's a party!

Anonymous said...

April 25, 2016 at 10:08 AM's comment no longer makes sense (it was funny) because Scooby deleted the post before it, and about 12 others on this thread. Such a huge hammer looking for a nail. Such a huge ego looking for a poor violator of his brainless, unpublicized, rules.

Anonymous said...

Scooby-Doo what did you do to my bitch craft comment? It is a clever turn of phrase. Don't tell me it offended you? It came from Hamilton New Yorker cartoon.

Anonymous said...

Scooby is a wannabe.

Anonymous said...

"And if she abandons her responsibilities and four or more people die she is qualified to run for president.

April 23, 2016 at 7:29 PM"

No, she would have to invade a country, kill hundreds of thousands of that countries civilians, sacrifice the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers based on faulty and misrepresented intelligence.

In your world, that would then qualify her.

Anonymous said...

She was the Secretary of State who supported that war.

Anonymous said...




Well...yeah. And?

Anonymous said...

Lots of Scooby stealth deletions here. Guess he's a Hillary fan.

Anonymous said...

April 24, 2016 at 5:38 PM

Please, post facts not conjecture masquerading as fact.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html

Anonymous said...

Fact: "Malicious intent" is not required to convict for mishandling classified information. Many of your colleagues at LANL and LLNL have been terminated or worse for lesser offenses. What would have happened to them for having TS/SCI ad TS/SAP material on their home email servers, regardless of "intent"??

Anonymous said...

You are making up facts again. You obviously haven't read the law nor the press releases from state and the FBI. With regard to LANL and LLNL, you are making all of that up as well. You have no understanding or you chose to ignore the law and the facts in hand. This is one of the greatest failings of the right wing. When confronted with facts that don't support a theory simply make some up.

Anonymous said...

I notice you don't bother to cite the law you said I haven't read. Another "fact in hand" is that the IC had said, repeatedly, that the classified info on the server included TS/SAP and TS/SCI (both of which I am familiar with, BTW). There is no dispute whether these were "properly classified." That information is solely under the purview of the IC and State has no say in it.

One of the greatest failings of the left wing is "magical thinking;" believing that something is true because you want it to be true. Demanding facts while ignoring them is a major symptom of the disease.

Anonymous said...

Every bit of classified that we know of was classified after the fact. You nor anyone else knows anything other than what has been reported in the press.You know that so why do you keep telling lies.
I am not going to recite the law for you. You need to take responsibility and determine for yourself what the law says. I have availed myself of that opportunity and clearly you haven't. Your ignorance is glaring.
The "IC" requested State classify emails and they agreed.At the time those emails were generated they were not classified. That is all we and you know.
Please quit making up "facts"

Anonymous said...

Rating 3/10. Boring thread. Pick it up folks. Started well, then turned into a personal bitch toss...pick it up or this blog dies up.

MESA monkeys can only carry you so far

Anonymous said...

Every bit of classified that we know of was classified after the fact.

May 6, 2016 at 5:25 PM

No, it was MARKED AND PROTECTED as classified after the fact. The fact that you don't know the difference says it all about your complete lack of knowledge about the subject. If you work at one of the national laboratories, go ask your Classification Officer. He/She will inform you of your ignorance.

Anonymous said...

Right, marked after the fact which means no intent on Clinton's part. You don't hold someone responsible for classified that was transmitted to them as unclassified. Thanks for at least acknowledging that fact. No more comments from me. Your on your own.

Anonymous said...

First of all, "not marked" is prima facie evidence of "intent." Why was it not marked? She told her people not to mark it!! Second, "no intent" does not equal "innocent" of mishandling classified information. Simple negligence is enough for conviction, or at least for indictment, which itself would end Hillary's political career.

Anonymous said...

If you did what she did you would be in Levenworth. White trash, white privilege.

Anonymous said...

If you copied a classified marked text from a classified system, transferred it ver batim unto an unclass network unmarked and stored it a home, it is a serious criminal violation. 1800 times its espionage. Spy c¤¤t.

Anonymous said...

If you are referring to Leavenworth penitentiary, that is an all male prison. If you are referring to Leavenworth military prison you would only be there because you violated some military law. Not sure this is applicable.

Anonymous said...

May 7, 2016 at 7:15 PM

I have not seen the evidence that demonstrates that is what has happened in the Clinton case. Can you supply a link?

Anonymous said...

Can you supply a link?

May 8, 2016 at 8:37 AM

Right. Like information confirming a specific compromise of classified information would be made public. That information is also classified.

Blog Archive